Ridiculous Words Lacking from the Google Chrome Dictionary
-
What about repeatability
-
It has inefficiencies but lacks efficiencies. What the crap, Google?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
It has inefficiencies but lacks efficiencies. What the crap, Google?
I've always suspected that they were lacking certain efficiencies.
...
lol at their expense. -
Got another one... natively.
-
I don't blame Google for not having this one but it needs to be added: performant
-
And, of course moreso and lessso.
-
And Google lacks the proper plural spelling of formula: formulæ
-
I think that Google skips ALL proper ash tree use spellings and only, sometimes, uses the expanded ae double characters instead
-
When you can't find somcthing obivous (with big words), speel it incorectly for more reults.
-
Another comparators.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Another comparators.
That is a seriously old word... I mean electrical engineering has been using it since the early 1900's not to mention the uses for it prior to that. Odd that the Chrome dictionary doesn't have it.
I find it annoying when the English spelling is right and the American spelling isn't.
-
It seems to be my wont in life to be forever using archaic word forms.
-
Hypervisor and the plural hypervisors.
-
How about miscommunicating.
-
Should you send your list to Google?
-
@nadnerB said:
Should you send your list to Google?
One would assume that Chrome would send back all local additions to the spell check list and eventually Google algorithms would update all users after a threshold of some type.
-
@JaredBusch Hopefully they do that, but it seems that if they were doing that they would have a lot more common words all ready.
-
really? walkable?
-
Wow, that's a big one to have missed.
-
And today: curation
Really? How is curation not in there?
